Suchergebnisse

This article assesses the usefulness for social media research of controversy analysis, an approach developed in Science and Technology Studies (STS) and related fields. We propose that this approach can help to address an important methodological problem in social media research, namely, the tension between social media as resource for social research and as an empirical object in its own right. Initially developed for analyzing interactions between science, technology, and society, controversy analysis has in recent decades been implemented digitally to study public debates and issues dynamics online. A key feature of controversy analysis as a digital method, we argue, is that it enables a symmetrical approach to the study of media-technological dynamics and issue dynamics. It allows us to pay equal attention to the ways in which a digital platform like Twitter mediates public issues, and to how controversies mediate "social media" as an object of public attention. To sketch the contours of such a symmetrical approach, the article discusses examples from a recent social media research project in which we mapped issues of "privacy" and "surveillance" in the wake of the National Security Agency (NSA) data leak by Edward Snowden in June 2013. Through a discussion of social media research practice, we then outline a symmetrical approach to analyzing controversy with social media. We conclude that the digital implementation of such an approach requires further exchanges between social media researchers and controversy analysts.

There is a long history in science and technology studies (STS) of tracking problematic objects, such as controversies, matters of concern, and issues, using various digital tools. But what happens when public problems do not play out in these familiar ways? In this paper, we will think through the methodological implications of studying "problems" in relation to recent events surrounding the sharing of patient data in the National Health Service in the United Kingdom. When a data sharing agreement called care.data was announced in 2013, nearly 1.5 million citizens chose to opt out. Yet, in subsequent years, there has been little evidence of a robust public mobilising around data sharing. We will attempt to track this elusive 'non problem' using some digital tools developed in STS for the purpose of mapping issues and problem definitions within science. Although we find these digital tools are unable to capture the "problem," the process of searching helps us map the terrain of the case and forces us to consider wider definitions.

The transition towards a sustainable and circular bioeconomy (CBE) is debated in European Union (EU) policy-making, at least since the first official Bioeconomy Strategy 2012 and during its update in 2018. Actors in different discourse coalitions utter conflicting narratives to (de-)legitimize both visions of why and what form of EU CBE is desirable as well as pathways to achieve these visions. Currently, CBE controversies on the EU level seem to be very polarized: Industry organizations and the core group of European Commission (COM) units involved in the further development of the Bioeconomy Strategy promote new technologies to increase the circular use of bio-resources, whereas environmental NGOs and parts of the COM point out adverse sustainability effects of increasing the use of bio-resources.

AbstractContent moderation comes with trade‐offs and moral dilemmas, particularly for transnational platforms governing borderline content where the boundaries of acceptability are subject to debate. While extensive research has explored the legality and legitimacy of platformised speech governance in established democracies, few address the complexities of less‐than‐democratic developing nations. Through sociolegal analysis and controversy mapping of TikTok's localised moderation in South and Southeast Asia, the study examines how major actors negotiate the shifting boundaries of online speech. The analysis reveals that neither the platform nor regional states are well‐positioned to achieve sound governance of borderline content. Primarily, TikTok localises its moderation based on pragmatic necessity rather than moral obligations, deliberately sidestepping contentious political controversies. Governments demonstrate determined efforts to control online discourse, leveraging legal uncertainty to further political agendas. Thus, local content governance often relies on vague rationales around securitisation and morality. The contradictory motives of (de)politicising borderline moderation seemingly counterbalance each other, yet in practice lead to an accountability vacuum where legitimate interests are sidelined. Given the lack of normative common ground, ensuring procedural justice and encouraging civic participation are essential to counteract rhetoric that rationalises imposition of certain speech norms hinging on imbalanced political power.

How political systems manage their policy controversies -- Blame games in the political sphere -- Blame games in the UK -- Blame games in Germany -- Blame games in Switzerland -- Mapping the influence of institutional factors -- Mapping the influence of issue characteristics -- A typological theory of blame games and their consequences -- Blame games and their implications for politics and democracy under pressure.

The roles digital media-technologies play in raising public issues relating to emerging technologies and their potential for engaging publics with science and policy assessments is a lively field of inquiry in Science and Technology Studies (STS). This paper presents an analysis of controversies over proposals for the large-scale removal of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CDR). The study combines a digital method (web-querying) with document analysis to map debates about two CDR approaches: bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) and afforestation. In the first step, we locate actors using the web to engage with BECCS and afforestation and map their alignments in relation to competing framings of CDR. In a second step, we examine the devices deployed by UK-based actors to evidence and contest the feasibility of BECCS and afforestation. Our analysis shows that policy distinctions between "natural" and "engineered" CDR are used flexibly in practice and do not map neatly onto actor engagement with BECCS and afforestation. We highlight the predominance of cross-cutting techno-economic expertise and argue that framings of CDR as a solution to governing climate change may contribute to public disengagement from climate policy processes. The paper reflects on methods for studying controversies, publics, and issues emerging around processes of technoscientific assessment.

Introduction -- 1. Mapping the Terrain of Muslim Women in 21st Century North America -- 2. Living the Dialogical: Negotiating Identity and Meaning -- 3. Pervasive Anxiety about Islam and Muslims: "Clash Literature" in North America -- 4. Dissidence, Dissonance, and the Politics of Muslim Women's Emancipation -- 5. Muslim Women Prayer Leadership and Gendered Sacred Space -- 6. Veil Controversies: The Dynamics of Inclusion and Exclusion -- Conclusion -- Index.

This qualitative study examines the pedagogical potential that a Cartography of Controversy (CoC) approach has in enabling secondary school students to unravel the complexity of socioscientific issues and to communicate about them. The aim was to examine the types of knowledge and the ways in which students approached uncertainty when asked to explore the badger-cattle controversy in England using the CoC approach. A learning sequence focusing on mapping controversies was designed and implemented across three lessons. Data collected from the students' cartographies and the audio-recordings of their group discussions during the mapping tasks showed that students were able to use scientific, economic, cultural, social, moral and political types of knowledge in their exploration of the controversy. Identifying tensions between different types of knowledge and becoming aware of their own uncertainties about the issue through posing and recording questions allowed students to identify where uncertainty existed within the SSI explored. The CoC approach allowed affordances for understanding the SSI depending on students' framing of the task (familiarisation, exploration, consolidation) and on the cartography's function as an observation, visualisation, and reflection tool at different stages of the learning sequence. Implications for further research and practice for developing students' socioscientific reasoning are discussed.

Drawing on Actor-Network Theory and the cartography of controversies, we present a method for ANTi-History research to investigate the implementation of a contract between a labour services company and a public university hospital in Brazil. The research question focuses on how the past is enacted in the present. The method is a general guideline based on five focal points used to organize the fieldwork: identifying controversies; mapping the actor-network; drawing out the translation process; politics of actor-networks and multiple reality/power relations. The proposed method makes two contributions to ANTi-History literature. First, although these focal points have been discussed by ANTi-History scholars, they are scattered throughout the literature. We unite them to offer a guide to doing historically embedded research. Second, we show how controversy analysis can be helpful for mapping the politics of actor-networks and describing multiple realities in the construction of history.

This is the first book to offer a long history of the military strategies, philosophical questions, ethical issues, and political controversies that lead up to the global war on terrorism and the Iraq War.

This is the first book to offer a long history of the military strategies, philosophical questions, ethical issues, and political controversies that lead up to the global war on terrorism and the Iraq War.

"Controversy Mapping" shows how we can use social research to bring controversies back to the surface of knowledge and public life, and how it can help to recover the power of controversy to transform what's possible. The book provides everything you need – the ideas, examples, and techniques – to start doing controversy analysis." Noortje Marres, University of Warwick "Venturini and Munk have produced a significant book that traces the genealogy of controversy mapping back to its origins in actor-network theory to its incarnations in digital methods. Through a lucid and engaging narrative and series of visualizations, they provide a comprehensive 'field guide' to the major figures, theories, concepts, and methods that make up the practices of controversy mapping." Evelyn Ruppert, Goldsmiths, University of London As disputes concerning the environment, the economy, and pandemics occupy public debate, we need to learn to navigate matters of public concern when facts are in doubt and expertise is contested. "Controversy Mapping" is the first book to introduce readers to the observation and representation of contested issues on digital media. Drawing on actor-network theory and digital methods, Venturini and Munk outline the conceptual underpinnings and the many tools and techniques of controversy mapping. They review its history in science and technology studies, discuss its methodological potential, and unfold its political implications. Through a range of cases and examples, they demonstrate how to chart actors and issues using digital fieldwork and computational techniques. A preface by Richard Rogers and an interview with Bruno Latour are also included. A crucial field guide and hands-on companion for the digital age, "Controversy Mapping" is an indispensable resource for students and scholars of media and communication, as well as activists, journalists, citizens, and decision makers.